Blue Dot Warning - Page 2 - Shooters Forum
» Advanced

Go Back   Shooters Forum > General > Warning Notices and Recalls
Register FAQ Members List Donate Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Like Tree2Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 01-28-2010, 10:55 AM
Rocky Raab's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 3,321

Registered Users do not see the above ad.


I asked them about BD at SHOT Show. They replied that there is no change in their position.

What happened (he said) was that in routine re-testing of their data, they observed some unusual pressure traces that exceeded allowable limits. Because they don't understand why, they recommend that BD not be used in those specific circumstances. Those are: all .41 Magnum loads and also in .357 Magnum loads with 125-gr jacketed bullets.

I believe that the situation is a result of using better test equipment. Such anomalies did not -and could not- be seen with copper crusher tests. Even the briefest pressure spike CAN be seen with transducer or strain gauge equipment. Labs are moving to transducer measurement, and as they do, old loads are looked at to verify their suitability.

It was not a mistake, nor deliberate obfuscation. They simply discovered something they couldn't have learned any earlier.

By the way; welcome, Wynn
__________________
To see my books and articles, just Google my name.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-28-2010, 07:42 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 24
Rocky,
Thanks for the info regarding their stance on the Blue Dot warning issue.

I did not breakdown any of the loads I had put together before the warning and have fired them off without issue(as expected).

However, I load(ed) Blue Dot in my .41 SPECIAL and even though I fired off what I had on hand of them I now have concerns.

My concern now is, With your new information on the subject do you still feel comfortable with using Blue Dot in the cartridges they warned of ?
Most concerning to me is .41 Special using 9.0gr. and 215Gr. LSWC

Thanks in advance and if you prefer please send me your thoughts email or message as we have before regarding the "Special" data.

Thanks
-2sigs
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 01-28-2010, 07:58 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 507
I use a lot of Blue Dot and have not had any problems with my loads, to me it is the universal powder, but I use it in a couple of magnum rounds and shotgun loads.

Thanks for letting us know,

Jerry
Reply With Quote
 
  #24  
Old 01-29-2010, 04:53 AM
Rocky Raab's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 3,321
I think that advanced testing methods may reveal even more previously unsuspected anomalies - with other cartridges and with other powders/load combos.

The problem with all this is that the pressure anomalies are in fact NOT detectable by other means. In other words, loads that produce occasional problems do seem to work fine most of the time. However, over the years there have been guns damaged for no discernible reason with loads that "had always worked fine." It is perhaps not confined to Blue Dot, therefore.

The .41 Special is a wholly different cartridge, so the warning might not apply to it. But it is also a wildcat, with no set standards OR lab testing. Use your own judgment regarding BlueDot loads in it. I think I'll use something else. (For those 3/4 throttle loads, Solo 1250 is superb.)
__________________
To see my books and articles, just Google my name.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-29-2010, 04:57 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 24
Thank you Rocky, Your opinion and discussion is always appreciated.

Now off the burn that BD in something else

Best wishes everyone
-2sigs
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:13 AM
unclenick's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hilliard, Ohio
Posts: 12,151
The Solo 1250 is good advice. I also keep finding niche loads for Power Pistol, if you need something a little slower?

Rocky,

Thanks for following up on the issue. I'll pass your info along to inquiring minds. I have a hard time believing the laws of physics have gone mysterious for just one particular powder, so, as you say, others may have hidden issues that will appear over time, too. Are they making any serious effort to nail it down? Perhaps this is a blending uniformity issue? Worst case would be a process consistency issue, in which case I would stand clear of that powder altogether. I sure would like to see those pressure traces.
__________________
Nick
__________________________
Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member
"First contemplation of the problems of Interior Ballistics gives the impression that they should yield rather easily to relatively simple methods of analysis. Further study shows the subject to be of almost unbelievable complexity." Homer Powley

Last edited by unclenick; 01-29-2010 at 06:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 01-29-2010, 07:04 AM
Rocky Raab's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Utah
Posts: 3,321
Nick, they do NOT relish talking about it. My rep's friendly face went to stone before I finished the question. I got a well-memorized reply.

I cannot say for sure, but I suspect that the traces aren't that bad. However, even though an occasional trace might not exceed the maximums by much, they do - and the engineers don't understand why.

In perspective, it's not as though we've been told to stop reloading those rounds altogether. There are several excellent powder choices for loads in that power bracket besides Blue Dot. It seems prudent to simply shrug, take their word for it and move on.
__________________
To see my books and articles, just Google my name.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-29-2010, 07:49 AM
unclenick's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hilliard, Ohio
Posts: 12,151
Yup. That's the prudent approach. They'll crow about it if they solve it, so I don't think we have to worry about learning of any solution that might come about? At the very least, I would be weighing individual charges in case small high-side errors produce disproportionate pressure increases? But there are enough powder alternatives out there to make that unnecessary.

When I spoke with SAAMI technical director Ken Green about proof loads a year ago, I pointed out to him that one problem I saw with SAAMI pressure standards is the averages only have to prove out over 10 shots. That's flat out not a statistically adequate number, and you occasionally see overly hot factory loads as a result of that inadequate sampling rate. It takes about 30 shots to have good confidence that the bell curve is reasonably symmetrical and that, therefore, the average is really close to the average a larger population will have, and that the standard deviation is meaningful. Ken said they just don't want to spend all day firing test loads, so they'd settled on 10 as a practical number. That may be, but all the same, it then can't be expected to provide a correct average all the time. So, it is no surprise to me that some loads could produce pressure deviations that are unexpected, even though the average of 10 earlier firings looked OK. That just means reducing the charge enough to compensate, but if that reduced load now averages lower than can be expected to show the powder well, it's a problem for the maker's sales, because we'll go to another powder anyway.
__________________
Nick
__________________________
Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member
"First contemplation of the problems of Interior Ballistics gives the impression that they should yield rather easily to relatively simple methods of analysis. Further study shows the subject to be of almost unbelievable complexity." Homer Powley

Last edited by unclenick; 01-29-2010 at 07:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-11-2010, 06:45 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 30
Yes, I use BD in 38 special w/158 SwGC but I won't say how much but ..it's a lot. I also loaded it with 110 Sierra's and they are above published loads as recommended by a bullet Co.They mushroom perfectly at 15ft and penetrate wet paper about 8" out of a 6" Colt Police Special. Oh, it's an older lot of powder too.CAUTION: This post discusses loads or load data that equals or exceeds published maximums for the cartridge(s) mentioned. Neither the writer, The Shooter's Forum, nor the staff of The Shooter's Forum assume any liability for damage or injury resulting from using this information. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO DUPLICATE THE DESCRIBED LOADS without first working them up from a published safe starting level charge while watching for pressure signs. If you don't know how to do that, don't try.

Last edited by BIG MIKE; 02-13-2010 at 03:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-02-2010, 06:04 PM
PSG-1's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 84
I've also used Blue Dot in my 357 Magnum, running both 125 grain and 158 grain bullets. Have used it in 9mm, 45 ACP, 44 Mag, 10mm and 40 S&W, and even 45 Colt. I also use it in my 16 ga target loads.

I've never had any issues with it.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 06-11-2010, 06:42 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 233
Rocky,
I like your attitude.
In 1976 when ever old Professor Rubens Sigelman [Some called him Professor Von Duck for his Einstein like German accent] would do a derivation and then check in the acoustics book by Kinsler, he would say, "What do you know? The book is right!"

Now that I am an old man, checking everything for correctness does not seem so strange.
Especially for handloading, where most things written are wrong.

Someone just sent me this link about Blue Dot and suggested, "
After digging around a bit, it looks like this guy might be the cause of all the problems. Or at least, the trigger that exposed some old, bad loads."
http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f...74/#post102852
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-28-2010, 02:57 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: S.C.
Posts: 4,168
Who are you, necoo? I did not get the memo, if you had to re-register with a new handle.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-11-2010, 03:22 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 62
I've seen this warning about Blue Dot for some time now though I never have untill now chimed in about it.

First off as any good reloader should know we always need to pay close attension when ever we see warnings being posted in good faith.

As I myself have always come down on the side of caution when my thoughts swing towards my reloading practices.

I use Blue Dot now , and have been using it for over 15 years, and I've never once had a problem. Though thats not to say someone else hasn't had a problem either. The one time I have had a problem with any reloading powder was a time when I had a problem with Lil-Gun in my 218 Bee. But thats another story all together.

As far as Blue Dot goes I've only tried it in Pistol loads, as I don't reload for my shot guns.

These days I only use Blue Dot in max loads for 125 grain bullets in my .357mag. and my 38 super.

I'm not going to list the loads I use in grains, but I will tell the velocities I've attained in both my S&W 6 inch, and my 5 inch Colt model 70.

The .357 125 grn. Hornady clocks along at 1650 fps. and in the Colt I went up to the second level loading charts and attained 1425 fps.

I've shot over 1000 rounds of stout Blue Dot load in my .357, and several hundred Blue Dot rounds in the 38 super.

Now of course I went through standard practices with both of these loadings in working them up slowly. So it's not to say that I would ever just look up a top load and figure (what the heck) and started stuffing cartidges. Any one who does that is only asking for trouble, and 9 times out of 10 thats what they wind up with (trouble)

In trying to avoid trouble,, especially so for the 38 super loads I worked up. What that involved was I had before me at the time 3 distinct catagories for the different levels of power for the 38 super. The highest catagory was intended for fully supported chambers only,, which by the way no stock chambered 38 super has one.

The other two levels of power were said to be safe in unsupported chambers.

Catagory number one were loads that could be used as max loads in the Colt 38 automatic which is an older round of Colts and is identicle in size and length to that of the 38 super. For all practicle purposses modern day loaded amunition for the 38 super is loaded to this level.

In Catagory two The 38 Super comes into it's own, and if one is found wanting to reach for these levels the absolute up-most in cautions are well advised.

All in all I've never had a bad word to say about Blue Dot, though just the same a word of caution should always be well-comed by those of us who choose to reload. Remember we should always re-work our loads for safties sake when ever we purchase a new can of powder. This also includes our old favorites we've used for what seems like forever as well.

Knowing if we do it that way ....

It's all good...
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-20-2011, 11:53 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: S.E. Lower Mich.
Posts: 942
Quote:
Originally Posted by jb12string View Post
Just saw this today:
Wholesalers carrying the Blue Dot powder brand from Alliant Powder should inform their retail customers of important safety information. ATK's Commercial Products Division has announced that Alliant Powder's Blue Dot should not be used in the .357 Magnum load when using 125-grain bullets (loads utilizing heavier bullets are acceptable for use with the powder).

Blue Dot powder should not be used with any loadings in the .41 Magnum cartridge.

Use of Blue Dot powder in either of the above mentioned applications could result in a dangerously high-pressure situation, the company announced.
Before I was aware of this I had loaded a dozen or so .357mags. I had no problem but it a light load. I have since used only Bulleyes. Loads good and accuracy is also good.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-24-2011, 10:48 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 140
So, in ya'lls opinion, is there any appreciable difference between Aliant Blue Dot and the older Hercules Blue Dot? I remember reading awhile back the after a powder company changes ownership, some of the powders are made in different plants or the chemical make up is changed somewhat.

The reason I ask this is that I had a stash of Hercules Blue Dot that I developed silhouette loads for my Winchester Trails End .44 mag. The load is 13 grains of Blue Dot and the Oregon Trail 240 grain rnfp/bb bullet of .431" diameter in starline brass and Fed 150 primers. Accuate load, not hot, sort of a medium load. Now I am getting low on the Hercules Blue Dot. If I have to start using Aliant Blue Dot, will there be any surprizes to look forward to.?

Sincerely,
Dave (Bubba) Thornblom
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-27-2011, 08:07 AM
unclenick's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hilliard, Ohio
Posts: 12,151
Move Yellowboy's post

Note. System didn't leave an auto-redirect. I moved Yellowboy's post to its own thread, here.
__________________
Nick
__________________________
Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member
"First contemplation of the problems of Interior Ballistics gives the impression that they should yield rather easily to relatively simple methods of analysis. Further study shows the subject to be of almost unbelievable complexity." Homer Powley
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 04-24-2012, 09:02 AM
3cl3c71k0r's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tulsa, Oklahoma
Posts: 61
Well, that would explain why my brass doesn't extract well from my revolver after firing. I've been shooting 125-grain JHPs over Blue Dot for a while now, and I see strangely inconsistent results. Most are just fine, but pretty often I get a sticky case and a flattened primer. Guess I'll have to switch to Power Pistol. Thanks.
Paradox23 likes this.
__________________
Great is the battle-god, great, and his kingdom -- the field where a thousand [prairie dogs] lie.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 04-28-2012, 03:25 AM
rifter's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Northwest Illinois
Posts: 1,346
I know this is an old thread, but since I've heard this warning for years, and have used Blue Dot exclusively for thirty years plus, thought I'd add something to the mix.

First, I'm not a light bullet fan in any caliber, so I can't speak to the 125 gr. .357 issue, but I did load a lot of the old Speer 160 gr. half jacket SWC bullets over BD. Accuracy was outstanding, high velocity, and no weirdness.

Blue Dot is also excellent in .44 Special and .44 Mag. A hard cast Keith style 250 gr SWC at 1000 fps is a superb load for field use and self defense in either case.

With heavy bullets (124 and 147 gr., respectively), performance is top notch in 9mm and .38 Super.

Where I am most familiar with Blue Dot, though, is in .45 ACP. Using the Hornady 230 gr. FMJ-FP, I loaded nearly 100k over a ten year period back in the days of Combat Pistol matches. Dead reliable, very accurate, 950 fps from a 5" barrel. I fooled around quite a bit with 250 gr. SWC cast in the ACP as well with excellent results.

Currently, I'm using it in the .45 Colt in a Ruger Blackhawk. 13 gr. under a Beartooth 265 WFNGC is running at about 1050 fps. Accuracy is about 2" at 25 yds. from the bench. Hopefully, this load will put some venison in the freezer next fall.

One thing that should be taken into consideration is that the newer lots of Blue Dot are faster than they were back in the day when I was shooting matches, requiring about 10% reduction in charge for the same fps as my old match load. Other than that, I'm still using it for my .45 load, and its just as good as it ever was.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05-04-2012, 07:46 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Adams County Idaho
Posts: 439
I have gotten hold of "Recalled" IMR 4227 and also Win 231 before which were waaay out of sorts from the normal configuaration, and my brother who works at Win Western at the time said there had been no recall of that paticular lot of powder. Yet there had been a recall notice. So although ATK has issued this warning there are folks who think that ATK's suggestion is only an unducated point of view. Listen and learn my friends. listen and be carefull.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05-04-2012, 12:11 PM
unclenick's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Hilliard, Ohio
Posts: 12,151
Yes. Don't you just love it that industry non-insiders think they're being reasonable to speculate about ATK's competency in issuing warnings? The Information Super Highway is just littered with those kinds of horse apples. And, of course, it misses the point. The warning was issued by Dick Quesenberry, Alliant Powder's product line manager, not fabricated from whole cloth at ATK corporate headquarters. It simply traveled via ATK letterhead as a corporate point of contact for distributors and probably to show the whole company took the warning seriously. (See the full text of the warning in my post #3 on page 1 of this thread.)

None of Rifter's reported applications are included in the warning; i.e., they are not about 125 grains bullets in the .357 S&W Magnum and they are not about .41 Remington Magnum loads. Thus they're not exceptions and don't contradict the warning in any way. Alliant says 158 grain bullets (and by inference Rifter's 160's) are just fine. They also still offer load data on the Alliant site that includes 110 grain bullets, and 140, 158, and 170 grain bullets. They've only excluded 125 to 135 grain bullets, that I can see, so presumably they've only seen the problem right in that 125 grain weight range in the .357 Mag.

I think Rocky's right that they just don't understand it at this point. It remains an empirically observed issue, but not a scientifically explained one. But that's OK. Your mom didn't have to understand the chemistry behind fire to know it could burn you, and she certainly didn't have to understand the chemistry behind fire to act responsibly in spreading the word to you about it's danger.
__________________
Nick
__________________________
Orange Hat Family Member
CMP Certified GSM Master Instructor
NRA Certified Instructor
NRA Benefactor Member
"First contemplation of the problems of Interior Ballistics gives the impression that they should yield rather easily to relatively simple methods of analysis. Further study shows the subject to be of almost unbelievable complexity." Homer Powley

Last edited by unclenick; 05-04-2012 at 12:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Blue Remington Peters 12 ga docbar85 Shotguns, Shotgunning, and Shotshell Reloading 19 04-22-2017 04:41 PM
SECURITY WARNING! Putting E-mail Addresses and Serial Numbers In Posts unclenick Trading Post 26 07-19-2016 09:51 PM
Ol' Blue MontyF Humor 1 04-28-2008 08:08 AM
Dot subtension Fullchoke Rifle, Shotgun and Handgun Scopes 1 02-06-2008 10:50 AM
480 Ruger reloading with Blue Dot Billdean Handloading Procedures/Practices 1 06-16-2005 10:00 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:05 PM.

< Contact Us - Shooters Forum - Archive - Privacy Statement >

 
 

All Content & Design Copyright © 1999-2002 Beartooth Bullets, All Rights Reserved
Privacy Statement | Contact Webmaster
Website Design & Development By Exbabylon Internet Solutions
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1